The EUROHIS-QOL 8-Item Index: Comparative Psychometric Properties to Its Parent WHOQOL-BREF

AbstractObjectivesTo test the psychometric properties of the EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index, a shortened version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument-Abbreviated Version (WHOQOL-BREF).MethodsThe sample consisted of 2359 subjects identified from primary care settings, with 1193 having a confirmed diagnosis of depression. Data came from six countries (Australia, Brazil, Israel, Russia, Spain, and the United States) involved in a large international study, the Longitudinal Investigation of Depression Outcomes. The structure of the EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index follows that of the WHOQOL-BREF assessment. Internal consistency was measured by using Cronbach's alpha. Convergent validity was assessed by using correlations with different measures for mental health (Symptom Checklist 90), physical health (self-evaluation), and quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF and short form 36 health survey). Discriminant group validity was assessed between diagnosed depressed and nondepressed patients. Differential item functioning and unidimensionality were analyzed by using Rasch analysis. Factor structure was assessed with structural equation modeling analyses.ResultsInternal consistency was acceptable (ranged between 0.72 and 0.81 across countries), and the index discriminated well between depression (t = 6.31–20.33; P < 0.001) across all countries. Correlations between the EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index and different measures—Symptom Checklist 90 (r = −0.42), physical health (r = −0.42), WHOQOL-BREF domains (r = 0.61–0.77), and short form 36 health survey (r = 0.58)—were all significant (P < 0.001). The index is unidimensional with desired item fit statistics. Two items (“daily living activities” and “enough money to meet your needs”) had residuals exceeding 4. Differential item functioning was observed with general quality of life, general health, relationships, and home items for age. A common one-factor structure with acceptable fit was identified in three out of six countries (comparative fit index = 0.85, root mean square error of approximation = 0.11).ConclusionsThe EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index showed acceptable cross-cultural performance and a satisfactory discriminant validity and would be a useful measure to include in studies to assess treatment effectiveness

Development and validation of the Brazilian version of the Attitudes to Aging Questionnaire (AAQ): An example of merging classical psychometric theory and the Rasch measurement model

Aging has determined a demographic shift in the world, which is considered a major societal achievement, and a challenge. Aging is primarily a subjective experience, shaped by factors such as gender and culture. There is a lack of instruments to assess attitudes to aging adequately. In addition, there is no instrument developed or validated in developing region contexts, so that the particularities of ageing in these areas are not included in the measures available. This paper aims to develop and validate a reliable attitude to aging instrument by combining classical psychometric approach and Rasch analysis

Projeto WHOQOL-OLD: método e resultados de grupos focais no Brasil

OBJECTIVES: Exploring the conditions that allow satisfactory quality of life in old age is an issue of scientific and social relevance. Thus, the objective of the study was to describe a quality of life assessment method for the elderly and present the results from focus groups conducted among old people in good health and ill health, as well as their caregivers. METHODS: The methodology used in the WHOQOL-OLD project is the same as utilized in the development of other WHOQOL modules. Five focus groups were conducted in Brazil. The sampling procedure was done according to convenience. Eighteen old people and five caregivers took part in the focus groups. All the focus groups followed a pre-established methodology. RESULTS: A tendency towards making an association between quality of life and wellbeing and feeling well was observed. The responses spontaneously included the 6 domains proposed in WHOQOL-100, thus corroborating the multidimensional nature of this construction. Nineteen out of the 24 original facets of this instrument were cited as relevant, and the five facets not spontaneously remembered were not concentrated in a single domain. When questioned about the importance of each of the 24 facets of WHOQOL-100, the groups considered all of them to be relevant. However, suggestions for modifications to five facets were made. Additional items were also examined and considered relevant for assessing quality of life among the elderly, by both the old people and the caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: The results corroborate the hypothesis that old people constitute a particular group and, as such, they have relevant specific characteristics. Thus, an appropriate instrument for assessing quality of life among the elderly needs to consider such matters.OBJETIVO: A investigação sobre as condições que permitem uma boa qualidade de vida na velhice é de interesse científico e social. Assim, o estudo objetivou apresentar a metodologia utilizada e os resultados dos grupos focais para avaliação da qualidade de vida do idoso. MÉTODOS: A metodologia do projeto WHOQOL-OLD é a mesma utilizada no desenvolvimento de outros módulos do WHOQOL. Foram realizados cinco grupos focais no Brasil. O método amostral foi o de conveniência. Dezoito idosos e cinco cuidadores participaram dos grupos focais. Todos os grupos obedeceram a uma metodologia pré-estabelecida. RESULTADOS: Observou-se uma tendência de associação entre qualidade de vida e bem-estar ou sentir-se bem. Espontaneamente, as respostas incluíram os seis domínios propostos no WHOQOL-100, reforçando a multidimensionalidade do construto. Das 24 facetas originais, 19 foram citadas como relevantes, sendo que as cinco facetas não espontaneamente lembradas não se centraram em um único domínio. Quando perguntados sobre a importância de cada uma das 24 facetas do WHOQOL-100, os grupos consideraram-nas todas relevantes. Foram sugeridas modificações para serem aplicadas a idosos para cinco facetas. Itens adicionais também foram examinados e considerados relevantes para a avaliação de qualidade de vida em idosos, tanto pelos idosos entrevistados como pelos cuidadores. CONCLUSÕES: Os resultados corroboram com a hipótese de que os idosos constituem um grupo particular e, como tal, apresentam especificidades de importante relevância para a qualidade de vida. Assim, um instrumento adequado para a avaliação da qualidade de vida de idosos tem que necessariamente contemplar esses aspectos

A eficácia do milnaciprano em pacientes ambulatoriais com transtorno depressivo maior não respondedores ao tratamento com ISRSs: um estudo aberto de 12 semanas

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of milnacipran in outpatients experiencing severe MDD non-respondent to adequate time and dosing of SSRI therapy. METHODS: A 12 week multi-centric study open study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of milnacipran after a SRRI trial failure. Complete remission (HAMD-17 < 8) was the principal outcome. Secondary outcomes were response (HAM &gt; 50%), CGI and quality of life measure (WHOQOL-Bref). RESULTS: The mean HAMD-17 score of the sample was 27 (7.2). The remission rates for minalcipran were 17.5% and response 61.3%. At baseline, 70.9% of the patients were markedly or severely ill. At treatment end, 48.1% of the patients were normal asymptomatic or borderline and 20.2% were mildly ill. Also, the four domains of WHOQOL-Bref, a generic instrument of Quality of Life, presented statistical and clinical differences. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that milnacipran is a possible option to be used in patients that were non-respondents to SSRIs. Since there is no evidence in literature that one single antidepressant is the best second step when an SSRI fail, milnacipran should be considered in the case of severe depressed patients.CONTEXTO: O objetivo deste estudo é avaliar a eficácia do milnaciprano em pacientes ambulatoriais com depressão maior grave que não respondem em tempo e em dosagem adequados à terapia com ISRSs. MÉTODOS: Um estudo aberto multicêntrico com a duração de 12 semanas foi elaborado para avaliar a eficácia do milnaciprano após falha em um experimento com ISRS. Remissão completa (HAMD-17 < 8) foi o desfecho principal. Os desfechos secundários foram resposta (HAM &gt; 50%), CGI e avaliação da qualidade de vida (WHOQOL-Bref). RESULTADOS: O escore HAMD-17 médio da amostra foi de 27 (7,2). As taxas de remissão com o milnaciprano foram de 17,5%, e as de resposta, 61,3%. Na linha de base, 70,9% dos pacientes foram classificados como gravemente sintomáticos. Ao final do tratamento, 48,1% dos pacientes foram classificados como normais assintomáticos ou sintomáticos limítrofes e 20,2% eram moderadamente sintomáticos. Além disso, os quatro domínios do WHOQOL-Bref, um instrumento genérico de mensuração de qualidade de vida, apresentou diferenças clínicas e estatísticas: CONCLUSÃO: Nossos resultados sugerem que o milnaciprano é uma possível opção para pacientes que não respondem a ISRSs. Uma vez que não há evidências na literatura de um antidepressivo que seja a melhor opção quando um ISRS falha, o uso do milnaciprano deveria ser considerado em casos de pacientes com depressão severa

Psychological distress as predictor of quality of life in men experiencing infertility: a cross-sectional survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Infertility is associated with impairment in human life. The quality of life (QOL) construct allows measuring the impact of health conditions in a broader way. The study aimed to explore the impact of the psychological distress on QOL's dimensions in men experiencing infertility.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>162 men were completed a socio-demographic form, SF-36, WHOQOL-BREF, Beck Anxiety Inventory and Beck Depression Inventory. Hierarchical regressions included demographic and clinic variables, and subsequently depression and anxiety were added.</p> <p>Results and Discussion</p> <p>Model 1 was not accurate in predicting QOL. R²values ranged from 0.029 (Social Functioning) to 0.149 (Mental Health). Eight domains were not associated with any of the predictors. In the second model, a R²increase was observed in all domains. R²of QOL scores ranged from .209 (Role Physical) to .406 (Social Functioning). The intensity of the depression was a significant predictor for all outcomes. The load of depression was higher than the ones of the socio-demographic and clinical variables. Anxiety levels have also presented the same effect, but with less intensity.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Subthreshold depression and anxiety were major predictors of QOL in men experiencing infertility. Health professionals need to include assessment of psychological symptomatology to plan more efficient interventions to infertile patients.</p

Which outcomes are most important to measure in patients with COVID-19 and how and when should these be measured? Development of an international standard set of outcomes measures for clinical use in patients with COVID-19: a report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) COVID-19 Working Group.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread morbidity and mortality with the consequences expected to be felt for many years. Significant variation exists in the care even of similar patients with COVID-19, including treatment practices within and between institutions. Outcome measures vary among clinical trials on the same therapies. Understanding which therapies are of most value is not possible unless consensus can be reached on which outcomes are most important to measure. Furthermore, consensus on the most important outcomes may enable patients to monitor and track their care, and may help providers to improve the care they offer through quality improvement. To develop a standardised minimum set of outcomes for clinical care, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled a working group (WG) of 28 volunteers, including health professionals, patients and patient representatives. Design: A list of outcomes important to patients and professionals was generated from a systematic review of the published literature using the MEDLINE database, from review of outcomes being measured in ongoing clinical trials, from a survey distributed to patients and patient networks, and from previously published ICHOM standard sets in other disease areas. Using an online-modified Delphi process, the WG selected outcomes of greatest importance. Results: The outcomes considered by the WG to be most important were selected and categorised into five domains: (1) functional status and quality of life, (2) mental functioning, (3) social functioning, (4) clinical outcomes and (5) symptoms. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, clinical factors and treatment-related factors. Conclusion: Implementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of care to patients with COVID-19. Their consistent definition and collection could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research.</p